Dr Found regularly presents specialist workshops, in handwriting and signature forensics to practitioners in Australia, New Zealand, America, Canada and Europe. He conducts these programs in his capacity as a Senior Research Fellow (School of human Biosciences, Latrobe University).

Currently the following workshops are available for internal training, seminars or conferences:

• Disguised Writing: An interactive 2 day workshop
• Forgery Science: An interactive 2 day workshop
• The Scientific Paradigm: An interactive 1.5 day workshop
• Sources of Expert Error in Disputed Signature Examinations
• Investigations of Disputed Signatures: Motor Control Perspectives
• Determining common authorship amongst multiple simulated signatures based on the analysis of motor strategy

Disguised writing: An interactive workshop
Duration 2 days

Empirical research strategies focussed on the elucidation and characterisation of Forensic Document Examiners’ (FDEs) skills has resulted in a body of data that indicates that there is a significant difference between the profiles of FDEs’ opinions on ‘natural’ versus ‘un-natural’ writings. Disguise and simulation behaviours have emerged as being particularly problematic for FDEs. These behaviours will be discussed with reference to theories of motor control and studies of writer behaviour. The application of these theories to forensic casework will be overviewed.  The goal is to focus on known examples of un-natural writing and understand why the shared nature of disguise and simulation predictors may result in erroneous authorship opinions.

Attendees will participate in hands-on examination of signatures and text samples to gain practical experience and to sharpen their skills in detecting un-natural writing predictors. At the end of the workshop attendees will be familiar with the relevant research on the subject, have gained an understanding of the difference between natural and un-natural writing behaviours and will have had experience examining samples of these writings with their peers.

Forgery Science: an interactive workshop
Duration 2 days

Forensic Document Examiners frequently encounter cases where signature forgery is alleged. Although much has been written on the topic of forgery and its predictors, the psycho-physiological basis of why it is that skilled signatures are difficult for individuals to mimic successfully has, for a variety of historical reasons, attracted little attention. This workshop will provide participants with information that should enable them to rationalise the features of forgery from a behavioural perspective.

Topics will include:

• Basic elements of the nervous system
• How the nervous system communicates
• Sensory/motor systems
• The control of handwriting movements
• Mimicking of movement control
  

Throughout the course, participants will be provided with opportunities to examine forged signatures and carry out blind tests to assist in the personal assessment of their skill with respect to relating theoretical constructs to casework problems.

Constructing a scientific paradigm for forensic handwriting identification evidence:
The use of blind testing to characterise specialists’ skills
Duration 1.5 days

This interactive 1.5 day workshop will explore the working research philosophy which has developed largely in response to academic criticism of forensic handwriting evidence as not being ‘scientific’ in character. Forensic Document Examiners in Australia and New Zealand have collaborated with an empirical scientific approach to their discipline for a number of years in an attempt to re-define the field in terms of accepted scientific principles. From this research the discipline now has access to empirical data which is providing the basic construct from which the probative value of specific categories of identification and exclusionary evidence can be inferred. In addition, the participation in blind testing has provided a window into elements of theory, aspects of claimed expertise, estimates of potential error rates, and has resulted in a large database of writings from which new training and research approaches can be based.

Topics to be discussed will be:

• Criticism of the evidence
• The scientific justification for blind testing
• The format of validation trials
• Research approaches to the characterisation of ‘skill’ versus ‘expertise’
• Elements of  cognitive method validation
• The estimation of the relative probative power of FDEs’ identification and exclusion opinionsRevision and corrective action strategies and impact of results
  

Sources of Expert Error in Disputed Signature Examinations

Bryan Found^1,2  BSc DipEd GradDipNeuroSci PhD & Doug Rogers¹  BSc (Hons) PhD

This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Forensic signature evidence has been accepted as ‘identification’ evidence for over a century. Contemporary forensic specialists have underpinned their opinions with theory (which is increasingly referenced to the motor control sciences) and the experience they gain through exposure to casework. Up until the early 1990’s little effort had been focussed on the validation of specialists’ claims to expertise. Very little was known regarding the potential error associated with signature examinations for the purpose of identifying or excluding the involvement of individuals based on their handwriting characteristics. Academic and judicial challenges to the evidence in the USA prompted some forensic handwriting specialists to engage in a re-think of their casework practices and in particular to address the dearth of information relating to skill validation. For more than ten years handwriting specialists internationally have collaborated with our university laboratory to test the skills that they claim to have. The results to date have redefined our understanding of the probative value of specialists’ opinions. One aspect of our findings relates to those questioned signatures where specialists express opinions that are in error or are contrary to the opinions of other specialists conducting the same examinations. This presentation will overview examples of such signatures and inferences will be made regarding the cognitive source of the erroneous opinions expressed.

Investigations of Disputed Signatures: Motor Control Perspectives

Bryan Found^1,2  PhD & Linton Mohammed³  MFS

This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it        This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Opinions by forensic specialists regarding the authenticity of disputed signatures are underpinned by both theoretical and experiential components. Traditional theory has, in recent times, evolved to incorporate aspects of the process by which complex movements are learned and carried out in the environment. Much of the theory required by forensic handwriting examiners can be extracted from the motor control literature.  This eight-hour workshop will provide participants with psycho-physiological theory directly related to the normal process of production of skilled signatures and will explore why it is, at a sensory/motor level, that skilled signatures are difficult for individuals to mimic successfully. The morning session will explore the theoretical relationship between the work of specialists on genuine, disguised, and simulated signatures and the production of these forms in both the static and dynamic domains. The afternoon session will be focused on real examples of these signatures; will provide participants with the opportunity to consider motor models of their production, in terms of features that they can observe, and will provide further insights into the interpretation of static features in the dynamic domain. Participants should gain a clear understanding of the relevance of motor control science to the forensic signature examination paradigm. They will be provided with opportunities to examine genuine, disguised, and simulated signatures and carry out blind tests to assist in their personal skill assessment with respect to relating theoretical constructs to casework problems.

Determining common authorship amongst multiple simulated signatures based on the analysis of motor strategy
Running time: 6 hours

Handwriting Analysis and Research Laboratory
School of Human Biosciences
Faculty of Health Sciences
Latrobe University
Bundoora, Victoria, Australia

Document Examination Unit
Digital and Document Evidence Branch
Chemistry Division
Victoria Police Forensic Services Centre
31 Forensic Drive
Macleod, Victoria, Australia

Signature comparisons are commonly carried out in day to day casework by Forensic Handwriting Examiners (FHEs). FHEs are skilled at forming opinions about the significance of similar and dissimilar features observed in a questioned signature when compared to a population of like features in a known sample of a writers signing behaviour. Predictor features associated with the act of simulation (copying or forging behaviour) are well documented. In relatively recent times the traditional beliefs of FHEs regarding the predictors of the simulation process have been the subject of research aligned with scientific models of motor control. To date little attention has been focussed on the validity of forming opinions regarding the inter-comparison of features associated with multiple questioned signatures (a task applicable to those real world cases where there exists more than one simulation of a common signature within the questioned document(s)). This workshop focuses on the properties of simulation behaviour in terms of models of motor control and the between simulator differences in simulation strategy as referenced through movement outcome. The objective of the workshop is to provide participants with an insight into the feasibility of common authorship opinions on multiple simulations by different writers. The workshop is comprised of a theoretical component and a large number of blinded practical exercises designed to develop, reinforce and test inter-simulation common authorship determinations by participating FHEs.

* Presenting author will depend on availability